Eye Sight question in court
If his eye sight is a tool, then am I correct in arguing that his eye sight must be tested and verified to be at least 20/20? Can he prove it and does his detachment have an annual eye check policy?
If I am guilty because of the 'strict liability laws', then must the prosecution prove that all measuring tools are acurate?
I haven't read anything about this before, but I KNOW I was not going 110 KM as the officer states.
-
Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1490
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Can I question him on the professional benefits to his career by taking part in such activities. Can I bring forward the fact that because of his active participation that he may have undue predjuice and be over zealous when it comes to ticketing those he is assuming are speeding. I can bring copies of periodicals showing his participation?
I am positive that I was NOT going as fast as I have been charged with.
-
Radar Identified
- Moderator
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
- Location: Toronto
No. His eyesight only has to be good enough to verify that the vehicle was speeding. There is no set standard for it. His testimony that he could see you speeding is good enough. You could try bringing in an eye chart, but unless you are, or have, a qualified optometrist, that's going to go nowhere. (In other words, I wouldn't recommend it.)Helper wrote:If his eye sight is a tool, then am I correct in arguing that his eye sight must be tested and verified to be at least 20/20?
Professional benefits? Such as? This would be a fruitless fishing expedition, IMO. It does not have anything to do with, whether you were exceeding the posted speed limit at the time. You'd need some way of showing that he deliberately falsified evidence. This article you refer to hardly sounds like it.Helper wrote:Can I question him on the professional benefits to his career by taking part in such activities.
Do the articles state that he has been previously caught faking traffic stops? Falsifying evidence? If not, what's the point? He's in traffic enforcement, his job is to stop and ticket people who do things like exceed the speed limit, etc. Where's the prejudice? If anything, this would backfire, because it would tend to show that the officer is experienced and dedicated to what he's doing. Speeding cases are not won on novel defences. They are won on technicalities, or goof-ups by the Prosecutor/officer. The stuff you're going after does not count as either. You're better off digging through the radar manual to see the correct methods for testing and using the device, and other things like that.Helper wrote:The officer that pulled me over and charged me has recently been in several news articles related to speeding and speed blitzs in his area.
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
-
- Similar Topics
-
-
New post Radar Detection and Line of Sight
by innocent1 in General TalkLast post by FyreStorm Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:58 pm
-
-
-
New post Court date - How to tell if Officer is in court?
by t3ch9 in General TalkLast post by jsherk Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:07 pm
-
-
-
New post 11B Question
by kruder in Courts and ProcedureLast post by ynotp Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:55 am
-
-
-
New post A question about disclosure
by stickz in General TalkLast post by argyll Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:18 pm
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
Help us, Help You!
Hello, we notice you may be using an adblocker...